Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.

Email This Story

Send email to this addressEnter Your NameAdd a comment hereVerification

This Wednesday afternoon, Far Right candidate Marine Le Pen and Centrist Emmanuel Macron, two contenders for the French presidency, clashed over their individual sentiments and propositions regarding the future of France, terrorism, and the value of the common euro on a nationally televised debate before the elections this upcoming Sunday. Regarded as one of the most controversial elections in the recent decade with the United States, the pugnacious exchange between Macron and Le Pen highlighted the bitter nature of the political process in the status quo as other countries grapple with similar critical issues that transcend party affiliations, and quite frankly, politics.

Both candidates can be contended to be a stark demonstration of utterly contradicting visions and statements regarding their just perspective of France in the near future, almost to an extent that many political analysts worry create a de facto segregation in nationalism and hegemonic pride. Primarily, the pertinence of this issue is greater escalated upon recognition of the brand and scale of legislations and policies proposed by the two contenders, which are undoubtedly polar opposites in content that could lead France into two entirely separate nations in both identity and characterization.

For the scion of the nation’s most reputed political families and the heir to a notoriously right winged party, Ms. Le Pen, 48, attempted to convey the merits of her conservative agenda in a battle that led her to redefine the institution of her family party, The National Front (FN in French). Viewed as a beacon of patrician wealth and power, Ms. Le Pen’s programs stress solidarity in issues that juxtapose eradicating the threat of illegal occupation by immigrants in France, hosting a referendum on European Union membership and abandoning the euro single currency all together. In the process, she has attempted to made progressive strides in establishing a new incentive for the party, whose roots can be traced back to her father and an appalling past of holocaust denial and castigation of immigrants.

Le Pen played the globalisation card in which she vigorously criticized Macron for maintaining an antiquated socialist fabric of governance and dubbed him a “smirking banker” who would bring lassitude in his programs and complacency in addressing Islamist Fundamentalism. Promoting a campaign amped on the war against terror, Le Pen has prioritized the restoration of a self determined and prudent France in all affairs, arguably to its original grassroots. Here, the sharpest division in the discourse came in the acknowledgement of the overwhelming threat of militant groups such as ISIS, which pose a dangerously unprecedented capacity to wage war from within France. A delicate issue in the country, Ingrid Melander from Reuters elucidates that more than 230 people have been slaughtered by Islamic militants since 2015.

“You are for laxism,” Ms. Le Pen boldly criticized, as claimed in the New York Times. “You are complacent toward Islamist fundamentalism. We’ve got to eradicate fundamentalist ideologies. You won’t do it, because they support you,” she continued. Le Pen made reference to the government’s S-files, which contain classified information regarding suspected citizens involved in terrorist activities, and their importance when examining the proper course of action in eradicating jihadist movements.

Emmanuel Macron , image courtesy of IBTimes

However, despite heavy opposition, Macron opposed the jarring sentiments, noting, as according to the New York Times that “The S-files are just information files. You can be an S filer merely for having crossed paths with a jihadist. You’ve got to be much more surgical than Ms. Le Pen,” he explained. What you are proposing, as usual, is mere powder”. He further mentioned Le Pen’s voting record, noting her own history repeatedly against legislations that outlined counterterrorism measures. Mr. Macron added, as reported by Reuters : “I will lead a fight against Islamist terrorism at every level. But what they are wanting, the trap they are holding out for us, is one that you offer-civil war.”

Upon Le Pen’s pivot to the discussion of abandoning the common euro to return to the franc currency, Mr. Macron constructively addressed the bold propositions of having an executive authority to carry out such a plan and sustain the economic toll upon the country in both measures. Similar to her proposal to host a referendum on a potential Frexit, he maintained that the notion to abandon the euro would be as Reuters found a “fatal plan and a dangerous plan.” “What you propose,” he added, “is currency war.” The former investment banker offered a financial perspective into the numerous repercussions and losses that France could incur, in which Le Pen had reiterated discrepancy in profit ratios and the ownership of currency, where the people profit in money that is not truly theirs.

During the cross examination period, she maintained the burden of rejoinder and refuted that “the euro is the currency of bankers, not that of the people,” Melander recorded. In recent days, it has become apparent that her stance on the issue remains irresolute, and it is corroborated by Reuters that around three quarters of French people oppose losing the euro, with many fearing it could potentially cost the common man his savings.

Arguably, political analysts and scholars in the art of debate narrow both sentiments to atrocious statements exchanged during the discussion over terrorism, in which Ms. Le Pen had sneered, as witnessed by The NY Times, that “You are the France of submission” to Mr. Macron. “We’ve seen the choices you’ve made, the cynical choices, that reveal the coldness of the investment banker you have never ceased being.”

Marie Le Pen, image courtesy of NBC News

Mr. Macron, on the opposing side, remained on the offense even when circumstances required him not to, but his collective disposition had garnered him the favor of opinion polls. Most notably, Macron said in respects to the future of France, as gathered and claimed by the NY Times : “Ms. Le Pen’s idea is that “we’re going to leave Europe because the others can’t make it, but we can’t. In the face of this spirit of defeat, I am for the spirit of conquest, because France has always succeeded.”

A recent poll conducted by Elabe for BFMTV after the conclusion of the debate found that 63% of French viewers found Macron to be the more convincing party through the course of the discussion than Le Pen, contributing to his growing reputation as the leading choice for the presidency.

With his growing insurgency and rapid political movement, En Marche!, it can be stated that a Macron candidacy is a likely assumption as the election transcends the standard norms of the voting process and restores France to its former glory in both diplomatic and nationalistic measures with a new administration to pave the way.